Week 5, Blog #2

In theory, I agree with the Chapter 10 discussion of performance management being a system for tracking and giving feedback to employees about how well they are accomplishing objectives tied to each of their key job dimensions. If this can be implemented well within an organization, it can be successful. Unfortunately, I’ve also seen how this system can be executed improperly. For example, one performance measure my employer espoused for an organizational unit was to ensure that 75% of employees’ training plans were being achieved 80% of the time. Assuming one could even get past this hard-to-follow statistical criterion, he/she would realize that this was not meaningful. For instance, for a small organizational unit of two or three employees, the 75% performance measure essentially meant that all training plans for staff within that group had to be achieved 80% of the time. And regardless of the size of the group, it still left many wondering what 80% of the time meant. Fortunately, the organization realized the error of its ways and modified this particular performance measure soon after it was implemented. The point here is that performance management can be an effective tool for organizational communication, but should also be viewed as a dynamic system that allows for continual improvement.

Week 5, Blog #1

In Chapter 9, the concept of empowerment and its relationship to leadership is discussed. I agree with the authors that empowerment enables and motivates employees “by building feelings of self-efficacy” (Eisenberg et al., 2007, pp. 292-293). In a previous entry, I talked about how empowered I felt when a supervisor gave me pop quizzes to help my growth and development within the organization. Empowerment is the kind of leadership quality I try instilling among staff in my organizational unit, and I am hopeful that it has had as much of a positive effect on others as it has on me. I’ve also had the misfortune (this is a relative term, because I believe you can learn a lot from these experiences too) of being micro-managed by supervisors who second-guess much of my (and others’) work. While I can appreciate a leader who wants to be engaged with his/her staff, if one goes overboard with this, it can lead to an increasing sense of distrust among employees – never an effective result if one is trying to achieve successful organizational communication.

Week 4, Blog #4

One aspect of the pervasive communication environment discussed in the web lecture, Technology and Teams, struck a chord with me. As professor indicates, “a pervasive communication environment gives us the ability to access, create, and share information in multimedia from almost anywhere, at anytime, for any reason.” I agree with this. I believe these technological advances have vastly improved our society. But during emergencies or other times of crisis, some of this pervasive communication environment we all have become so reliant upon will likely be useless, and in some cases, this could be devastating. For instance, on the evening of October 30th last year, a magnitude 5.6-earthquake struck just northeast of San Jose. Thankfully, I don’t believe this tremor caused major damage or injuries, but it definitely got people’s attention. After the ‘quake, I immediately tried calling my wife who was out doing errands at the time. I got a busy signal. Why? Well, countless others were doing exactly the same thing at the same time, overloading this system we’ve all put our trust in. I was just calling to find out if she was o.k. But what if someone really needed help right away, what then? (Even at that time, I knew I shouldn’t have tried calling for this very reason (i.e., I should have left the lines open for people who really had emergencies), but I just couldn’t help making sure my wife was all right.) My point here is that even with this pseudo-emergency of an event, our society had communication problems. Not to be a downer, but I shudder to think about what communications would be like if we had a truly major emergency. I heed professor’s commentary that we need to “make technology work” for us under any circumstance, as the communication imperative suggests.

Week 4, Blog #3

A subtle, yet intriguing point about emergent communication networks is made in Chapter 8. The authors assert that “research has shown that informal communication through the grapevine is as a rule more efficient and accurate than the formal dissemination of information” (Eisenberg et al., 2007, p. 259). I find this to be profound. Based on my experiences, I’ve found it convenient to place a stigma on the “rumor mill”, associating it with gossip. From this (admittedly narrow-minded) perspective, one would think that it would be important to quell any rumors or other grapevine-type information in an organization. But I can also see how inhibiting this interaction can slowly damage an organization. I liken this “formal dissemination of information” to business where it is often said that “word of mouth” is more effective than any marketing campaign or catchy television ad.

Week 4, Blog #2

The discussion of the paradoxes of employee participation and workplace democracy in Chapter 8 resonates well with me in my experiences in the public sector. I completely agree with the authors’ contention that “while most of us believe that increased employee participation in decision making will lead to improved outcomes, the reality is not so clear-cut” (Eisenberg et al., 2007, pp. 230-231). I’ve been aware of project groups that have tried to embrace this team concept to decision-making. The problem, I’ve found, is that teams struggle to ultimately arrive at a decision, and keep “spinning their wheels” with no clear direction for moving forward. And in the cases where decisions are made, some team members object, believing their opinions or recommendations were ignored. It is apparent that in these situations, effective management and leadership need to be in place to ensure that the concept of employee participation and workplace democracy will succeed as part of effective organizational communication.

Week 4, Blog #1

In Chapter 7, the authors discuss gendered organizations and work/life. Specific to the topic of parental leave, I believe the organization I work for has made some positive strides establishing criteria for such leave. But even with these clear policies, the concept of a man taking an extended period of time for this special time with his wife and child has not yet fully engrained itself into the organizational culture. When I took time off for this very reason, I was generally supported, but I also received some incredulous responses. One colleague remarked that he was astonished that I was taking weeks off to be with my family when he only took a couple of days off for his first-born. I did not take this personally, nor did feel as though I was being “perceived as having less career potential” (Eisenberg et al., 2007, p. 212). I realized that there were generational considerations at work here (e.g., this colleague is about twenty years older than me), and I believe it’s important to acknowledge this when dealing with communication in an organization, particularly if that organization is trying to “develop more gender equitable policies” (Eisenberg et al., 2007, p. 213).

Week 3, Blog #4

In the web lecture, Metaphors and Culture, and in Chapter 5, the fragmentation approach toward organizational culture is discussed. The ambiguities associated with this concept are important parts of the organizational culture. I can corroborate the story of a university’s selection of CAO (Eisenberg et al., 2007, pp. 145-146) with my own experiences in a government agency and the hiring of a particular manager. Depending on with whom one spoke, one would receive different responses about this process. Some thought the employee had the necessary knowledge and experience to manage the unit. Others, however, believed the employee was the wrong fit for the group; some even suggested that preferential treatment may have been involved. The takeaway message for me here is that as long as I acknowledge that fragmentation occurs in an organization, I can better understand that there really is no one right answer to a particular question.

Week 3, Blog #3

In the web lecture, Metaphors and Culture, metaphors are defined as those which “help people understand one thing (unknown) in terms of another (known)”. Notwithstanding the limitations associated with certain types of metaphors (as the conduit metaphor has been so described), I believe metaphors can still be powerful forms of communication within an organization. For example, in trying to describe the difference between leadership and management in an organization, one metaphor has always resonated with me: “Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall” (Stephen R. Covey). I understand that this metaphor alone is not likely to be an effective enough form of organizational communication. It also takes soliciting feedback and building message redundancy to make this kind of message stick.

Week 3, Blog #2

Chapter 6 includes a discussion of organizing healthy organizations. When I think of health and safety in an organization, I immediately picture the maintenance worker in the field working on heavy machinery with the appropriate personal protective equipment (e.g., hard hat, steel-toe boots). While this concept is important, from an organizational communication perspective, the science of ergonomics is likely more critical. Although it sounds almost silly (it did to me at first), office workers can easily become injured on the job due to a number of seemingly harmless, everyday activities. Actions such as improper posture in one’s chair, inappropriate use of the telephone (e.g., bending one’s neck to hold the phone between one’s shoulder and ear to have two free hands to type or write), incorrect positioning of one’s arms while using a computer keyboard (e.g., can lead to repetitive stress injuries), or even looking at the computer monitor for prolonged periods of time have cost organizations millions of dollars in worker compensation claims and/or lost person-hours each year. Organizations are becoming increasingly aware of this trend, with some requiring that all employees enroll in ergonomics training to minimize the potentially deleterious effects mentioned previously. This is especially important given the increased amount of communication that occurs on-line (like this class!).

Week 3, Blog #1

I found relevance in the socialization concept discussed in Chapter 5 as it relates to organizational communication. I appreciate how the authors break down socialization into three stages of learning: (1) anticipatory socialization; (2) organizational assimilation; and (3) organizational turning points or exits. It helps reinforce one lesson I learned in a graduate course on public management. My instructor made the point that most people who begin jobs are enthusiastic, motivated, and ready to learn about and contribute to the organization (akin to organizational anticipatory socialization). But over time, employees’ enthusiasm and motivation can wane or even disappear altogether, and often times it is the organization that has failed them. I believe this can occur if the “degree of balance” between discovering constraints and the transition toward assimilation tends toward a pattern of “resistance” or “exit” (Eisenberg et al., 2007, p. 149).

Week 2, Blog #4

The notions of processes and feedback (Chapter 4) carry much relevance in my work experience as they relate to organizational communication. My employer recently instituted a quality and environmental management system consistent with standards developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Under this type of system, processes for typical work practices are established. In an ideal workplace setting, such work processes would be used primarily as reference documents because staff would already know precisely what needs to be done. If, however, these processes are not effective, ISO allows for (more accurately, requires) a mechanism for making changes. Any employee can submit a corrective or preventive action request (CPAR) to request improvements to a workflow process. This virtual feedback loop allows for continuous improvement within the organization and ultimately, enhances organizational communication therein.

Week 2, Blog #3

I have found the concept of interdependence, a quality of a system as defined in Chapter 4, to be truly essential for organizing, organizations, and organizational communication. There are many aspects of my work that require me to be interdependent upon others in order for our organization to be successful (and vice-versa). When organizing my plans, I do so with the knowledge that others will ultimately need to review and approve such items before they are implemented. Within the organization, others recognize that their review and approval of such plans, while more effective if they are done thoroughly, cannot be put on the “back burner” because of the negative consequences of inaction. From an organizational communication perspective, I have found it critical to develop and maintain effective lines of communication not only within the organization, but also with outside governmental organizations and local community groups to ensure a project succeeds. My experiences corroborate the authors’ finding that “[a] failure to recognize the interdependency and consequences of one’s actions can be devastating to both the individual and the system” (Eisenberg et.al., 2007, p. 107).

Week 2, Blog #2

In Chapter 3, Eisenberg et.al. discuss the human relations approach. In my work experiences, I have found this approach to be employed positively and negatively. In my first job after obtaining my undergraduate degree, the organization for which I worked was in disarray. There was hardly a semblance of organization, not much organizing, nor was there effective organizational communication. I did not feel at all “united” as the human relations approach suggests (Eisenberg et.al., 2007, p. 82). What was encouraging to me, however, was that my supervisor looked beyond the imperfections of the organization to encourage effective communication. For example, my supervisor developed pop quizzes for me to take based on his past work experiences in the organization to help prepare me for advancement in the organization. In this way, my supervisor was an “effective manager” who “encouraged [me] to identify with the organization”, thereby inspiring, motivating, and empowering me (Eisenberg et.al., 2007, p. 82).

Week 2, Blog #1

In reading about the scientific management theory of the classical management approach in Chapter 3, I am reminded that while, from the engineering perspective of which I am accustomed, Frederick Taylor’s theory for workplace organization seems so practical, it is also fraught with fatal flaws. From an organizing and organizations’ perspective, the theory works well if applied to non-human subjects (e.g., items such as tools, equipment, materials (“widgets”)). In my experiences, however, scientific management does not seem to be effective for organizational communication. I have found that while there is a time and place for managers to be the ultimate decision-makers, communication in an organization is more effective when all employees feel as though they have been made part of the solution. For example, in my work, I prepare design drawings that need to be constructed. While it is critical for an engineer to have researched, analyzed, and developed a solution to a particular problem, I have often found the most insightful perspectives to be borne from the so-called “blue-collar” worker (e.g., a heavy equipment operator who might have only a high school education, but has years of practical, on-the-ground construction experience). I also find it somewhat ironic that Taylor’s scientific management concept – originally intended for implementation in the workplace – has found relevance in, of all places, the home, “to give order to [working families’] busy lives” (Eisenberg et.al., 2007, p. 73).

Introduction

Hello. I’m currently a graduate student in the Master of Public Administration program. I work for a local government agency and have been in this organization for nine years. Prior to this, I worked in the private sector. Within the public sector, I’ve seen how communication differs from that of the private sector. While the constituents of both private and public sectors can be viewed as customers, those of private industry are often shareholders, while those of government are taxpayers. I’ve also learned that, if done effectively, communicating in the public sector allows me to make a difference in people’s lives – something I’m not always successful at, but continually strive for.